Complaining that emacs pulls in too much stuff is like complaining that water is too wet. Clearly you are not cut out for emacs.

Actually, it doesn't have a whole lot of dependencies; it's that they apparently have the "graphical" version of it enabled by default, and there are a shitpile of optional add-ons. It looks like it can become the "one program you use for everything", which might be interesting to play with, but potentially time-consuming and disappointing, and I'm not sure I want to join a religion like that.

Dunno what the big deal is Emacs has at least two terminal emulators built in. It even has a mode to kill buffers that have been open for a long time. There is even a hack floating around that embeds a webkit browser inside emacs._________________Ware wa mutekinari.
Wa ga kage waza ni kanau mono nashi.
Wa ga ichigeki wa mutekinari.

"First there was nothing, so the lord gave us light. There was still nothing, but at least you could see it."

Four pages later BK hasn't installed emacs yet. Nevermind even using it.

I'm going to report this thread and ask BK to be permabanned just for that._________________"Defeat is a state of mind. No one is ever defeated, until defeat has been accepted as a reality." -- Bruce Lee

Dunno what the big deal is Emacs has at least two terminal emulators built in. It even has a mode to kill buffers that have been open for a long time. There is even a hack floating around that embeds a webkit browser inside emacs.

wouldn't supprise me if emacs could run X windows

NQS_________________These opinions are mine, mine I say! Piss off and get your own.

Dunno what the big deal is Emacs has at least two terminal emulators built in. It even has a mode to kill buffers that have been open for a long time. There is even a hack floating around that embeds a webkit browser inside emacs.

That's only part of its problems._________________

juniper wrote:

you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.

You wouldn't. My point was that somebody who describes themselves as a "Python developer" obviously considers that their language of choice, and since it is also (like Java) a flexible, multi-purpose, multi-paradigm interpreted language in which several IDEs have been written, why would one not choose to use an IDE written in one's own language of choice, which thereby enables one to have a higher level of mastery and control of it (for example, creating one's own customizations, plugin-ins, and contributions to it).

This is not a portable concept to all languages. One would not demand an IDE written in BASH for the purposes of writing BASH scripts, because BASH is not a suitable language for the creation of an IDE. The idea is ludicrous and an illogical appeal to ridicule.

An intelligent answer might be, "I might, except those IDEs suck, don't have the features I need." A strawman suggesting that my argument was that people should always use an IDE written in the language they are using (which I did not say or even imply) is, on the other hand, not an intelligent argument.

Im a developer, I get given stupid deadlines and almost impossible tasks for my timeframe, I need a program that helps me code, test, debug and integrate into my VCS.

Aptana does all three for me (really well) I honestly couldn't give a sausage what language it was written in, because I a, never going to extend the project, it works fine as is. You could tell me it was written by someone who's now sleeping with my ex, it helps me bring in the ££ and makes my life a lot easier.

I've avoided it all this time. I've used vi. I use a tiling window manager. I just feel like my GNU/Linux experience cannot be complete without at least trying Emacs. No bullshit X version: the real thing.

Any big hints or warnings before I take the plunge?

Welcome to the 20th century. When will you catch up with the presence?

I prefer Emacs for large files. Emacs was an arbitrary choice of editors for me when I made the decision. I realized that I needed my fingers to "know" a proper editor, and Emacs was my choice. I've never understood the hate towards Emacs from the VI users, and vice versa. For small files, nano's fine._________________People Of Love

A warning: If you want to use the graphical Emacs with the daemon/emacsclient as many do, I recommend compiling it with the lucid toolkit instead of GTK, due to a bug in GTK that makes it unreliable.

My /etc/portage/package.use contains the following:

Code:

app-editors/emacs -gtk

Never had a problem with USE=gtk emacs. Could you elaborate please? I use gtk, not gtk3.

Due to a bug that has been in GTK since 2002 or earlier, Emacs in daemon mode will die if X dies with a graphical frame open.

Oh that. I never considered it being a GTK bug, because when you run rxvt-unicode in daemon mode and X dies, the urxvtc instances get killed which kills urxvtd too. I always thought it was an Xlib thing, that killing an X process propagates the kill, oddly enough.

Anyways, if X dies (which is quite rare) it's simple enough just to run 'urxvtd' and 'rc' which starts up the daemons again. If necessary, I can recover the session within emacs.

So if you're looking for just an editor, emacs will appear bloated to you. On the other hand, some of us enjoy having an agenda planner integrated in a project documentation file, exporting it into LaTeX and mailing it to someone, all that just with a few keystrokes. Matter of preference.

I've avoided it all this time. I've used vi. I use a tiling window manager. I just feel like my GNU/Linux experience cannot be complete without at least trying Emacs. No bullshit X version: the real thing.

Any big hints or warnings before I take the plunge?

Welcome to the 20th century. When will you catch up with the presence?

The presence of what? Is that what you call yourself, like Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino? Wild "The Presence" Horse?

Dunno what the big deal is Emacs has at least two terminal emulators built in. It even has a mode to kill buffers that have been open for a long time. There is even a hack floating around that embeds a webkit browser inside emacs.

That's only part of its problems.

Meh it comes in handy on systems with not so great terminals like windows or on laptops where screen space is limited and switching to and fro is cumbersome at best. Neither of these things get in the way when I do not use them._________________Ware wa mutekinari.
Wa ga kage waza ni kanau mono nashi.
Wa ga ichigeki wa mutekinari.

"First there was nothing, so the lord gave us light. There was still nothing, but at least you could see it."

It looks like a nice too, and I like Eclipse too. But, you still haven't answered the question: why would a Python developer be using an IDE written in Java rather than one written in Python?

Why the fuck would you have to use an IDE written in the language of your project?
I mean, that must've been the kind of thinking that lead to the development of apache ant: "Guys, we need something for our build scripts" "Uhm, how 'bout make?" "We can't use that, it's not written in Java"

It was easier to write a new buildtool than writing portable make files._________________If English was good enough for Jesus, then it's good enough for you!

I've avoided it all this time. I've used vi. I use a tiling window manager. I just feel like my GNU/Linux experience cannot be complete without at least trying Emacs. No bullshit X version: the real thing.

Any big hints or warnings before I take the plunge?

Welcome to the 20th century. When will you catch up with the presence?

The presence of what? Is that what you call yourself, like Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino? Wild "The Presence" Horse?

The presence of what? Is that what you call yourself, like Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino? Wild "The Presence" Horse?

It's "Jack Presence" which can be built into the kernel. It detects if someone knows "Jack" or needs "Jack on/off" on a real time basis. It doesn't enlarge the kernel by much, but can taint keyboard, display and digital insertion drivers.

Ok I installed it, with all USE flags disabled for now. I kind of like it, although it may be more than I want in an editor. I'm trying to give it a fair shake and not just reject it because it's unfamiliar. It certainly has son nice features, and it's quite refined, as terminal applications go. I have just scratched the surface at this point.

After a few days of immersion, I have to say it's pretty awesome. This is no "editor", though; this is an IDE with a unique method and degree of integration.

The latest version has its own integrated package (i.e. extension) manager, and if you add a couple of popular repositories you have thousands of extensions to choose from, some of which are very cool. While I installed it stripped of all USE flags and am using it in a terminal emulator, my observation thus far is that it doesn't use much RAM, considering the package size (which bundles a lot of optional extensions, not loaded by default.

It's got the most complete, well-organized, and easily accessible documentation of any application I've used, which is important since the default configuration alone offers about 2,000 commands. It even has a vi-mode with adjustable level of vi emulation.

My take at this point is that Emacs would be far more useful than vim for serious, deeply-involved, time consuming project work, but it is probably overkill on overkill for others.

I have to say it's much nicer than I expected. Going to play around with it until I feel like I have a good idea of its pluses and minuses.

After a few days of immersion, I have to say it's pretty awesome. This is no "editor", though; this is an IDE with a unique method and degree of integration.

The latest version has its own integrated package (i.e. extension) manager, and if you add a couple of popular repositories you have thousands of extensions to choose from, some of which are very cool. While I installed it stripped of all USE flags and am using it in a terminal emulator, my observation thus far is that it doesn't use much RAM, considering the package size (which bundles a lot of optional extensions, not loaded by default.

It's got the most complete, well-organized, and easily accessible documentation of any application I've used, which is important since the default configuration alone offers about 2,000 commands. It even has a vi-mode with adjustable level of vi emulation.

My take at this point is that Emacs would be far more useful than vim for serious, deeply-involved, time consuming project work, but it is probably overkill on overkill for others.

I have to say it's much nicer than I expected. Going to play around with it until I feel like I have a good idea of its pluses and minuses.

Well.... Crap.

Now I'm going to have to try emacs. _________________CFLAGS=" -O999999"

My take at this point is that Emacs would be far more useful than vim for serious, deeply-involved, time consuming project work

For coding at least, I've seen people do some pretty damned amazing stuff. I'm not saying emacs can't. Are you referring to more than just coding? For word processing type work, I've not seen anyone use vi effectively._________________42

For coding at least, I've seen people do some pretty damned amazing stuff. I'm not saying emacs can't. Are you referring to more than just coding? For word processing type work, I've not seen anyone use vi effectively.